Forum Index
»
Jobs and Careers
Even worse, you are likely a GS-13 or higher being paid in the six figures (which is the majority of federal workers who post on DCUM). The same thing is happening to GS-1 through GS-10 workers who are making low to mid five figures. Many of them don't have emergency options like savings to pay bills due while not getting a paycheck. Some of them might be able to swing one month of missed mortgage payments, but many do not have two months of mortgage and utilities and food bills, etc to cover more than a month of delayed payment. And while the PP feels really sorry for the contractors, the federal contract workforce is almost double the federal civil service workforce. There are roughly 1.2M civil service employees and well over 2M federal contractors. Of those federal contractors, only a small portion have forward funded contracts that allow them to work. There are millions of contractors who will not get paid for time off during a shutdown. So, PP's sympathy is pretty much worth the same as conservatives "thoughts and prayers" when children are slaughtered by guns. What we really need is to have rules on automatic continuance of federal pay for employees (both civil service and contractors) during a shutdown. Pay for employees needs to be pulled from discretionary spending and put into essential funding that is not covered by lack of appropriations. There are many things that are not included in discretionary spending and we need to move employee pay from one side of the ledger to the other so that federal employees (both civil service and contractor) are no longer political pawns of the childish Congress. If not, then perhaps a rule that the Congressional appropriations bill should be the last bill to pass. In several of these shutdowns, the Congressional appropriations was passed when others were not, so that the Congress and their staff were paid to work through the shutdown while others were not. Congressmen should learn to work without pay or have their pay delayed until after they do their jobs and if they have to do their jobs with no staffers to help them, then maybe they'll actually feel like acting more like an adult than like a toddler. |
No, that's not the goal. The goal is to avoid the tremendous economic dislocation and impact of the type of shutdown that you all are suggesting. I am not sure there is an appreciation of how catastrophic that type of shutdown would be. Again, your goal is to minimize the impact on federal employees. That's perfectly understandable. But that's not my goal, and it's not necessarily the one that is in the best interest of the country. Your strategy is to make the consequences of the shutdown so severe that Congress wouldn't dream of letting it get to that point. While great in theory, in practice it's very dangerous. There's no indication that Congress as a whole is, at this point of time, capable of exercising that kind of rational thinking. Remember the fiscal cliff of 2012-13? The crazy caucus in the House is more powerful and less controlled than it was then. Look, I get that federal workers get screwed here, and it's tough for many of them. But the "shut it all down" proposals all assume that the total shutdown would never happen. I think that's wildly optimistic, and if there's even a chance to avoid that kind of catastrophe, we should. We all would like it if there were no further shutdowns. But if you're honest, you'll recognize that for the country as a whole (not federal workers), limiting the consequences of one is the right way to go. |
I am the PP everyone hates, and I don't have a problem with this. I would note, however, that you are arguing that the government should mitigate the effect of the shutdown, not make it worse. That's exactly what I'm saying. Your fellow travelers, on the other hand, want to shut down everything - make the consequences for the country much worse if a shutdown happens. |
|
The thing that most people don't (or want to) comprehend is that shutting down the government and reopening the government costs enormous amounts of money. It's grossly inefficient. Work that the American taxpayer is depending on, work that keeps our economy going is getting delayed.
Have you ever stepped away from a project/task for weeks/months? It takes lots of hours/work to get back to where you started, especially if it was complicated matter. |
And the taxpayer are funding people not working and then paying OT for them to catch up...or not but then corners are cut. |
Not to mention all the planning and handwringing we're doing now, in anticipation of the shutdown. We could have launched a product in October and now I'm not sure how to proceed, and I won't have clear guidance until next week if I'm lucky. |
DP. I don't hate you but I think you're veru incorrect.
PPs are trying to deal in incentives. Either make a shutdown so bad nobody does it / they pass legislation to make it impossible, or make it so toothless it's not a bargaining chip. Your suggestion - that the less visible parts of government shut down (including payroll) - is the staus quo. It enables one side to hold the other hostage by making human shields out of SSA recipients and others, and is therefore no solution. It also has contributed to the slow denigrating of government services that allows people to say government doesn't do anything, because anything above the bare minimum keeps getting shut down every couple years. |
Agreed, nobody is starting anything new and is in wait-and-see mode. It's so unproductive. |
| Shutdowns are terrible for employee morale and recruiting. |
Amen. |
It's called a lockout. |
No it is not. Because the less harm is done via their "shutdowns," the more tempted the GQP is to run up at one again. And THAT is terrible for all of us. National defense is obligatory. Civilian air traffic control is not. |
My goal is not to minimize the effect on federal employees or contractors, it’s simply to let the actual consequences of political choas happen and not have employees bare all the cost while the public is blissfully ignorant. If you haven’t appropriated pay for TSA or FAA they should stop working and we close our airports. Instead you choose to have them work without pay, at great cost to them personally, because you value the public benefit more than them. My choice would be the public gets exactly what it pays for, no more no less. And if they want to elect politicians who don’t want to pay anyone to send out their SSA checks then that’s what they get. |
It's weird. In my office, there's not been a single mention of a shutdown. I'm working with a colleague form another agency, and her last comment to me was "I wouldn't worry about it yet (as I strive to wrap up our shared project prior to 10/1.) |
This is the most profoundly non-strategic thinking about government I have heard in a very long time. Remarkable. Not in a good way. |